O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 31-39-1 (2019)

Legislative findings and intent

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The General Assembly finds that although cardiopulmonary resuscitation has proved invaluable in the reversal of sudden, unexpected death, it is appropriate for an attending physician, in certain circumstances, to issue an order not to attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation of a patient where appropriate consent or authorization has been obtained. The General Assembly further finds that there is a need to establish and clarify the rights and obligations of patients, their families or representatives, and health care providers regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the issuance of orders not to resuscitate. The General Assembly further finds that, in the interest of protecting individual autonomy, cardiopulmonary resuscitation in some circumstances may cause loss of patient dignity and unnecessary pain and suffering. In recognition of the considerable uncertainty in the medical and legal professions as to the legality of implementing orders not to resuscitate, in recognition of the request of the Supreme Court of Georgia for legislative guidance in this area, and in recognition of the dignity and privacy which patients have a right to expect, the General Assembly declares that the laws of the State of Georgia shall recognize the right of patients or other authorized persons to instruct physicians and other health care personnel to refrain from cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

History

Code 1981, § 31-39-1, enacted by Ga. L. 1991, p. 1853, § 1; Ga. L. 1994, p. 672, § 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1992–2023 · leading case: Velez v. Bethune, 466 S.E.2d 627 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995).
Velez v. Bethune, 466 S.E.2d 627 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 20× “Following that decision, the legislature delineated certain rights and obligations with respect to the question of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, in OCGA § 31-39-1 et seq. See In re Jane Doe, 262 Ga.”
In Re Jane Doe, 418 S.E.2d 3 (Ga. 1992). · cites it 8× “(Durable Power of Attorney for Health Care); and OCGA § 31-39-1 et seq. (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation).”
State of Georgia v. Sistersong Women of Color Reproductive Just. Collective, 317 Ga. 528 (Ga. 2023). · cites it 4× “” (citation and punctuation omitted)); OCGA § 31-39-1 (legislative findings that, in the interest of “protecting individual autonomy,” and in recognition of patients’ “dignity and privacy,” patients may instruct health care personnel to refrain from performing cardiopulmonary…”
Ussery v. Child.'s Healthcare of Atlanta, Inc., 656 S.E.2d 882 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “) and the Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Act (OCGA § 31-39-1 et seq.) do not govern the issue in this matter, it is worth noting that under OCGA§§ 31-32-9 (b) and 31-39-2 (4), decisions to withdraw life support or withhold resuscitation, respectively, require input from only the…”
Edwards v. Shumate, 468 S.E.2d 23 (Ga. 1996). · cites it 2× “7 See OCGA §§ 31-39-1 to 31-39-9. 8 Subsection (a) of § 31-39-4 provides as follows: (a) It shall be lawful for the attending physician to issue an order not to resuscitate pursuant to the requirements of this chapter.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.